Gas stove you mean…
A hammer may be used for purposeful destruction as easily, although it's performance for that would be much lower and require more skills.
oh, they're SAFER by yards
but it's the difference between a modern firearm and a last-century one in some ways
modern gas stoves have failsafe mechanisms that approach towards the safety level of electric stoves
yet both are foiled if you simply lay a long dish towel across them and make sure a few flammables in the kitchen are "unfortunately near"
(which is as close to a point as I was ever trying to make saying it at all, honestly)
we all know nothing is safe; if you have to rub someone out in theory you could grind up a chalkboard eraser and feed it to them (and feel free to look into where THAT analogy element was stolen from, good luck). but as you said, it's not as safe as a rubber duck.
hammers are a lot closer, esp in terms of unleashed tools of destruction like 'fire' hidden within it that grow without attendance under the right circumstances
if you can get an easy, obvious snowball rolling (or fire started) with it, it's not a simple tool, is my rough thinking here
@solder_on I've got your point, I believe, from the very beginning: I'm just arguing about the details, if you don't mind…
Also, WRT flammable: the highest cooking temperatures are lower than lowest temperatures of the most flammable materials to catch fire. So I suppose any properly tuned safety switch will turn off the heating before it can ignite anything.
> highest cooking temperatures
> lower than [...] most flammable materials
not paper, cloth, I've seen burnt potholders that I've had to douse in a sink
maybe it technically wouldn't ignite gasoline or something (I failed ochem SO hard) but it'd be trivial to two-stage the sabotage -- dish towel as fuse towards more flammable things, more flammable things are findable in a house, etc.
I mean, shit, you can make a microwave a bomb with household chemicals and aluminum foil
plus, arguably, cooktops in general have had longer to evolve than the microwave heat radiation cooking methods; more safeguards make sense
it's just that people sneer at safeguards *all the time* in the much more vital work of software and hardware in tech
software back in the day was "how do we wire this"
now it's "how do we decide how this can function, and we better hope we're well-informed", because if they're not well informed you get hardware like that medical device that could kill
@solder_on The temperatures as high as in frying can damage/destroy materials (that's what cooking basically is…), but to ignite them the reaction has to be self-sustained.
Frankly, IDK what would ignite at temperatures only slightly above the boiling point of water in normal atmospheric pressure.
OTOH, this can make the materials more susceptible to other factors (sunlight, sparks, etc.) and cause a "cascading effect".
> slightly above the boiling point of water
water's boiling point is like 200ish F, and stovetops get to 500ish F O_o
plus I've seen grease fires personally (although I didn't CAUSE them, lucky me)
off the top of my head; paper, cloth, flesh if you've got a corpse to char up, candles, a box or book of matches, lighter fluid...
I watched my dad light a cigarette off the stove burner a few times, maybe false memory
but kitchens and houses include flammables in general, I mean
@solder_on Yes, actually many old-fashioned electric heating elements are "open type", where the tungsten thread can be accessed directly — it's temperature is pretty high, enough to ignite as cellulose as fats. Those are as dangerous as open fire.
So, yep, unless we mean a very specific type of stove, you're right: it may cause fire left unsupervised, and probably will, given enough time.
software and hardware are still inextricably on two sides of a shouting match that gestalt system design ('holistic' if you're into the actual meaning and not the faux medical meaning) has not yet settled meaningfully
it needs to
and it needs to without corps strangling it into a money-generating scheme or else we've got the now-problem again already
> I've got your point
I am glad if that is the case, and I hope it is. (I'm a bit wary it's entirely true, but that's because I've talked to a lot of people the last three years who "got my point" and then did shit like voted Brexit, Trump, or some other fash shit. Hard to imagine your points matter when people do the exact fucking opposite consistently, yanno? 😆)
anyway, yeah, that stuff, etc. etc.
The social network of the future: No ads, no corporate surveillance, ethical design, and decentralization! Own your data with Mastodon!